Back in July 1794 (and to be clear, we weren’t yet around), a rowdy bunch of folks in nearby western Pennsylvania were mad as hell and wouldn’t take it any more. They railed against big government, regulatory oppression and – of course – taxes. In this case, taxes on their beloved hard liquor – which in those days our forebears consumed like thirsty fish.
What followed was the Whiskey Rebellion, a rather underrated historical event in the formation of a young America. If it sounds like an old-fashioned Tea Party, it was.
Fast forward to America just after World War I, and the Temperance Movement and a variety of other factors resulted in a Constitutional amendment banning the consumption and distribution of alcohol. This was outlined spectacularly in Daniel Okrent’s new book, “Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition.”
A decade later, the folly of teetotaler totalitarianism became soberingly evident to just about everyone, and Prohibition was repealed. Years later, we still say “cheers” to that (and so do the tax coffers of fifty states).
But – still mistrustful of a marketplace of commerce driven by hard liquor – a state-run system of control and distribution was hatched in a dozen or so states, including Virginia.
Seventy-six years later, the government-controlled franchise remains in place, looking not that dissimilar to the Byrd Organization’s Commonwealth of the 1930s.
A government-run and controlled industry such as the Alcoholic Beverage Control, or ABC, in Virginia strikes us as deeply anachronistic – even in tradition-laden Virginia. It’s time to get our state out of the booze business once and for all.
It’s time for a new Whiskey Rebellion.
As a candidate, Robert McDonnell campaigned in 2009 to free Virginia from the shackles of a government-run alcohol industry, with the intent to use proceeds from its divestiture to shore up a painfully depleted transportation budget.
As governor, McDonnell is now making the privatization of the ABC behemoth a core proposal in his commission on government reform.
We strongly agree with the goals and mission of the proposal. While there are three other options on the table for ABC reform, there is economic and moral purity and clarity in full divestiture.
Most of all, it’s a matter of moral principle: No government should be in the business of distributing and selling alcohol – or tobacco, for that matter. It’s about partly restoring integrity and good governance to Richmond. It’s about putting principle over profits.
A close second is the issue of allowing the free market to flourish, and pushing privatization wherever possible. State government doesn’t know how to run a business better than the marketplace; government should be left to focus on core functions. Selling Jack (Daniels), Jim (Beam) and Johnny (Walker) isn’t one of ‘em.
Of course, the proverbial devil is in the details – and this is where the complexity fizzes to the surface.
Virginia’s ABC system has about 334 stores statewide that generate roughly $100 to $200 million in annual profits – not a paltry sum. These funds flow into the General Fund, and help support everything from education to mental health to prison operations. In a privatization scheme, this revenue stream would partly vanish.
But under a core proposal in McDonnell’s wise scheme, a one-time payout of roughly $300 to $500 million would be generated from the sale of licenses (depending on how many are auctioned) and assets – and then dedicated in full to transportation needs. That still leaves a “what happens next” in terms of the loss of annual revenue from the actual sale of the hard liquor. But, to be clear, the tax revenues from sales would continue to flow to the General Fund.
We believe the state could recoup – in part – the annual revenue stream it gets today by granting as many distilled-spirits licenses as possible to all retail outlets that now sell wine and beer. That’s possibly about 3,000, including big-box and grocery stores. With more stores selling the product, and with expanded product availability, tax proceeds would unquestionably increase for maximum financial gain. One estimate has a full ABC privatization scheme yielding as much as $179 million each year in state tax proceeds. The state could also increase the levy on alcohol sales – slightly – as part of this process, to generate even more funds.
Consumers win because they can make one trip for their adult beverage needs instead of the current two trips needed. And there’s no longer any loss of state revenue by keeping consumers in Virginia, instead of losing them to D.C. and Maryland stores. Further, private-sector companies would compete actively against each other to provide not only the best price for consumers, but the best product selection as well. Then there’s the issue of creating hundreds if not thousands of private-sector jobs through divestiture (ABC stores are run by state workers.)
This is not a fiscal panacea for our transportation woes and needs – which are calculated at $4 billion over the next six years. It’s the accounting version of a one-hit wonder. But it should tide us over until real transportation reform arrives, which must – imperatively – still happen. ABC privatization is no long-term roads fix at all.
As strongly as we support this idea, we recognize that if this sea-change shift comes about, a far-reaching societal impact is possible. We’ll need to dedicate more time, funds and staff to monitoring and – if necessary – beef up substance-abuse programs, DUI/DWI enforcement and SoberRide. A small portion of the one-time $300 to $500 million sale of licenses and assets should be dedicated to these programs. It’s the responsible thing to do.
That means the state ABC agency must have an expanded role as regulator and enforcer. That will be a tall order if this massive and complex proposal is enacted. According to state officials, the ABC enforcement division is already short-staffed, with 16 vacant positions for full-time sworn agents. The General Assembly should fix that if ABC reform occurs.
Previous governors have toyed with the idea of meaningful ABC reform for the past 30 years. McDonnell has a real chance to make it happen now, and in a bipartisan way. If it can be done the right way, it should be done now.
I still maintain that if the Governor would like to restore at least 100 million to the state treasury, he should consider ceasing the wasteful advertising of the state lottery. Advertising the lottery makes as much sense as advertising a traffic light. Put ‘Lady Luck’ in the unemployment line already.
Let the Free Market work. Deregulation will create widespread competition, driving down prices for consumers and increasing tax revenue for the government.
Its typical of Virginia to focus on how Richmond can get out the liquor store business but still gather all the money it brings in!. It seems to me that since local jurisdictions will bear the brunt of increased number of liquor outlets and subsequent adverse effects of more alcohol on the streets, they should be a player in this!.. Towns, counties etc. should be able to set the number of outlets desired by their communities and charge a fee for the licenses achieving local benefits to compensate for the impact. Richmond can collect the state sales taxes and fees for regulating the industry - a win for all! Wake up Virginia communities stop letting Richmond control your life!
Government business should be limited to those operations that are required to sustain the welfare and safety of the public. This includes things like fire prevention, sanitation, law enforcement, and public transportation (and hopefully health care, but the Constitution wasn’t written in a day.) Alcohol should not fall into that category.
But this sounds like VA is trading a yearly 100-200m income for a one-time 300-500m payout. That sounds more like Corporate Welfare than anything else.
What is needed is some sort of renewable-licensing scheme for businesses involved in the sale of alcohol, coupled with a privatization that protects the state’s income and is in our best interest.
And alcohol clearly needs to be regulated: we consented to that the moment we accept a drinking age. Good regulation does two things, protecting the public, and protecting the honest business from the crooked. If a business can run a liquor store cleanly, safely, and in a conscienscious manner, then it can and should be a part of VA business.
“One estimate has a full ABC privatization scheme yielding as much as $179 million each year in state tax proceeds.”
- Yeah? What do the other estimates show? A $200 million dollar loss in revenue to the state’s budget? No thanks.
You should see what Pennsylvania is doing right now w/ wine sales in grocery stores. Large boxy kiosk vending machines that scan ID’s and require a breathalyzer test to purchase a bottle of vino. Only a handful of stores have 6-pack beer sales, but in a separate area w/ their own check-outs (like the Wegmans cafe areas). VA is light-years ahead of that state, but behind others. I frankly don’t see why regulation of a product that is so clearly an interstate product (produced from & distributed to all over the country) is done state by state (and thus, differently). If there was a federal regulation of it, then it’d be equal for all 50 states, and there’d be no border hopping (ala PA to MD, NoVA to DC & MD, etc.) near state boundaries, and isolated interiors (ie State College, PA, Richmond) with no other feasible choice but what that state allows. Then again, allowing individual states to elect to have income taxes pulls population and wealth from those states that do to those that don’t (FL TX WASH AK). Again, an unfair playing field for the states…but hey, who said life is fair, that’s the American way many would say…so keep on keepin’ on Virginny, do it your own way.
Ok, I am as libertarian as Ron Paul when it comes to drug and alcohol regulation but what you are saying is let’s offset the drop in tax revenue by selling more alcohol. Not so sure that’s the answer. Better to treat it like we treat tobacco - increase the tax to drive revenues and reduce consumption/abuse. Agreed that better substance abuse treatment is important. Again the libertarian part of me cries out that DUI/DWI enforcement is already too invasive of our civil liberties. Perhaps there is another way to further reduce DUIs without the heavy hand of government and MADD…